Zevachim 96b — the Talmud in English

And even Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda did not say

that they make service vessels that are not made of metal

but of wood

he alone permits.

But earthenware, no.

For everyone agrees that they do not make service vessels of earthenware.

Rabbi Yitzhak son of Rabbi Yehuda was accustomed

to study

before Rami bar Hama.

One day,

he left him,

Rabbi Yitzhak son of Rabbi Yehuda left Rami bar Hama,

and went

Rabbi Yitzhak to study

before Rav Sheshet.

One day, he encountered

Rami bar Hama

him,

Rabbi Yitzhak.

He said to him

Rami bar Hama to Rabbi Yitzhak:

“When the duke grasped me by the hand, fragrance came to his hand” ["When the duke took hold of me by my hand, the scent of royalty was absorbed into my hand!” This is a metaphor for the haughty, who strive to stand in the place of the great], and is it

that

because you went before Rav Sheshet, you have become like Rav Sheshet,

you have already become like Rav Sheshet!?

He said to him

Rabbi Yitzhak to Rami bar Hama:

“No.”

I did not intend, out of pride, to leave you and study from him, but

because of this

I went to study from Rav Sheshet, because

my master,

for my master,

when I ask him a matter, he resolves it for me through reasoning.

But afterward,

when I find a beraita—

I refute it!

That is, Rabbi Yitzhak would ask a problem, and Rami bar Hama would resolve it for him only through reasoning; and when Rabbi Yitzhak would find some beraita opposed to Rami bar Hama’s reasoning, it would refute the reasoning, because the reasoning of an amora cannot stand against a beraita taught by a tanai.

But

Rav Sheshet, when I ask him a matter,

when I ask him something,

he resolves it for me from a beraita

he answers me from a beraita [because the beraitot were arranged in his mouth],

for even when I find a beraita and refute it,

so that even when I find another beraita against Rav Sheshet’s beraita, this does not refute him, because

it is a beraita against a beraita!

For Rav Sheshet’s tradition still stands, since there is a beraita supporting his words, and therefore it is not refuted because of the other beraita.

He said to him

Rami bar Hama to Rabbi Yitzhak:

“Ask me a matter”

ask me some tradition,

that can be resolved for you

through reasoning

as a beraita,

so that when you examine the beraita closely, you will find it like my reasoning.

He asked him

Rabbi Yitzhak of Rami bar Hama:

“He cooked

consecrated meat

in part of a

vessel

whose other part is outside the fire; does the vessel

require scouring and rinsing of the entire vessel, or does it not require

scouring and rinsing of the entire vessel?”

And Rami bar Hama answered him: Its law is that

it does not require it, as is the case with the sprinkling

of sin-offering blood that splashed on a garment, concerning which it is stated in the Mishna that only the place of the blood requires laundering.

And Rabbi Yitzhak refuted him:

“But it was not taught so!”

We have not found a beraita written as you said, whereas you said that you had to resolve it from a beraita or Mishna.

He said to him

Rami bar Hama to Rabbi Yitzhak:

“It stands to reason, as with a garment,

like the law of a garment that is written in the Mishna.

Just as a garment requires laundering only at the place of the blood

and not the entire garment,

so too a vessel

of metal

requires scouring and rinsing only at the place of cooking

and not the entire vessel.”

And Rabbi Yitzhak refuted him:

“Are they comparable,

for the law of a garment is not comparable to the matter under discussion

Blood does not spread through,

for it does not spread throughout the garment, but

cooking spreads through

the entire vessel and is absorbed throughout it?

And furthermore,

there is another difficulty, for

it was taught:

there is

a stringency with sprinkling

of sin-offering blood that splashed

over scouring and rinsing.

And there is

a stringency with scouring and rinsing over sprinkling.

How so?

The stringency with sprinkling? Sprinkling applies to external sin-offerings and to internal sin-offerings,

for the law of laundering applies to both,

and it applies before the casting. Unlike scouring and rinsing,

which does not apply to internal offerings, and does not apply before the casting, since the law of scouring and rinsing applies only to things that are eaten, for adjacent to this it is written: “Every male among the priests shall eat it.”

How so?

The stringency with scouring and rinsing? Scouring and rinsing apply both to the most sacred offerings and to lesser consecrated offerings; if one cooked in part of the vessel, the entire vessel requires scouring and rinsing. Unlike sprinkling.

Thus there is an explicit beraita that the law of a garment upon which blood splashed on part of it is not like the law of cooking that was cooked in part of a vessel; rather, cooking in part of a vessel requires scouring and rinsing throughout it.

And we conclude:

He said to him

Rami to Rabbi Yitzhak:

“If it was taught,

it was taught”

and one does not dispute the beraita on the basis of reasoning.

And we considered it:

“And what is the reason”

that scouring and rinsing are required throughout the entire vessel if one cooked in part of a vessel?

The verse says: “If it was cooked in a copper vessel,”

and we expound:

“even”

if it was cooked

in part of the vessel,

it requires scouring and rinsing throughout the entire vessel [because it spreads through all of it].

We learned in the Mishna:

“Both the most sacred offerings

and the lesser consecrated offerings require scouring and rinsing.”

The Sages taught:

It is stated, “This is the law of the

sin-offering”

at the beginning of the passage.

I have

no source that scouring and rinsing are required

except for a sin-offering.

All consecrated offerings—from where

do we know that vessels in which the meat of consecrated offerings was cooked require scouring and rinsing?

The verse states,

“Every male among the priests shall eat it,”

“It is most sacred.”

And this is explained in the Gemara below.

Could I include teruma

so that if teruma was cooked in a vessel, the vessel requires scouring and rinsing?

The verse states

“Every male among the priests shall eat”

“it,”

and this was stated after scouring and rinsing, and we expound “it”:

excluding teruma, the words of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Shimon says: The most sacred offerings require scouring and rinsing; lesser consecrated offerings do not require scouring and rinsing.

What is Rabbi Yehuda’s reason? For it is written, “most sacred.”

And apparently this implies specifically

“the most sacred offerings—yes.”

But

“lesser consecrated offerings—not.”

However,

since “it” was needed to exclude teruma, it follows that lesser consecrated offerings require scouring and rinsing.

And that which is written, “most sacred,” is not specifically so; rather, all consecrated offerings are included by it except teruma.

And Rabbi Shimon could say to you that the exposition from

“it,” as we said

above, is that Rabbi Shimon expounds “it”: valid, and not invalid; and Rabbi Shimon excluded a sin-offering that had a period of fitness and became disqualified, whose blood does not require laundering.

And we refute:

“And

is it the case that

teruma does not require scouring and rinsing

according to both Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon?

But it was taught: A pot in which one cooked meat—one may not cook milk in it. And if one cooked,

everything becomes prohibited if there was in it

a giving of taste.

If one cooked teruma in it, one may not cook ordinary food in it. And if one cooked, there is a giving of taste.

And the ordinary food becomes prohibited to non-priests. Thus, a vessel in which one cooked teruma requires heating in order to expel the teruma absorbed in the vessel, so that it should not prohibit the ordinary food that will be cooked in it.

And we answer:

Abaye said: It is necessary

and certainly teruma also requires heating; the exclusion of teruma from the law of scouring and rinsing

is rather as the master said: If one cooked

consecrated meat

in part of a vessel, the entire vessel requires scouring and rinsing.

And we infer:

Here,

if one cooked

teruma

in part of a vessel,

it does not require

heating

except at the place of cooking.

For teruma requires heating only at the place of cooking, whereas consecrated offerings require scouring and rinsing throughout the entire vessel.

And we answer further:

Rava said: It is necessary

to exclude teruma from the law of scouring and rinsing

rather as the master said,

for it is stated, “And he shall scour and rinse in water,” and we expound:

“In water, and not in wine. In water, and not in diluted wine,”

wine and water mixed together.

Here,

with teruma, it is possible to perform the heating

even in wine, and even in diluted wine.

For the Torah was particular only concerning expelling the prohibition absorbed in it; therefore, with teruma, wine and diluted wine are also effective.

And we answer further:

Rabba bar Ulla said: It is necessary

to exclude teruma from the law of scouring and rinsing

rather as the master said: Scouring and rinsing are with cold water,

for they must be rinsed with cold water after the heating in hot water,

here,

with teruma, it is possible to perform the heating

even with hot water

alone, and afterward scouring and rinsing with cold water is not required.

And we refute:

This works according to the one who says that scouring and rinsing are with cold water,

and one can distinguish as we said.

But according to the one who says that scouring is with hot water and rinsing with cold water,

which is their heating,

what is there to say?

What was teruma excluded from? [For everyone agrees that teruma also requires heating like them.]

And we answer:

“An additional rinsing,”

vessels in which consecrated offerings were cooked, after heating—which is their scouring—must be rinsed with cold water; but vessels in which teruma was cooked do not require rinsing with cold water after their heating.

Mishna:

Rabbi Tarfon says: If one cooked in it from the beginning of the Festival,

a vessel in which one cooked the meat of consecrated offerings from the beginning of the Festival,

he may cook in it throughout the Festival

without scouring and rinsing. At the end of the Festival he shall scour and rinse it, because since there are many offerings during the Festival, and he cooks in it every day, each day it expels what it absorbed the previous day, before it becomes notar.

And the Sages say: Until the time of eating

it is permitted to cook in it without scouring and rinsing until the end of the time for eating the offering—that is, peace-offerings for two days and one night, and a sin-offering for one day and one night. Afterward, even if he cooked in it in the meantime, it requires scouring and rinsing, because perhaps some of the first absorption remained in it, which has now become notar.

Scouring and rinsing

how so?

Scouring—

like the scouring of a cup

for Grace after Meals, which must be thoroughly rinsed and washed from the inside.

And rinsing—

like the rinsing of the cup

of blessing, which requires rinsing and washing on the outside.

Scouring

with hot water

and rinsing with cold water.